Mental health experts question claims in Defense Secretary Jim Mattis’ transgender study
“The Pentagon’s claim that the scientific evidence is at best ‘unclear’ for treatment of gender dysphoria, the condition of being unhappy in your current gender, and that treatment may not relieve serious risks such as suicide is not the current medical consensus, according to the American Psychiatric Association and American Psychological Association.” W.Examiner
….is really the best way of describing this, along with the note that a claim is “especially not true” among those working in the field. Um, since when does a fact become “especially true”, or a fiction become “especially not true”, simply because of who’s stating it?
What’s going on here is that the researchers are admitting that their approach to truth is relative, and the method they’re using to impose their will is to assign heavier weights to research with which they agree. Now to some extent you can’t avoid this—a meta-analysis is, after all, exactly such a study of studies—but the APA’s approach is suspect when one of their big lines is that ambiguous with regards to truth.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
Discussion